State of M.P. v. Narayan Singh case summary

STATE OF M.P. Vs. NARAYAN SINGH AND ORS.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA 

JULY 25, 1989

CASE ON MENS REA

Question before the court :

Whether the violation of export of fertilizer without permit required to proved mens rea.
Whether the act of the respondents were mere preperation or the attempted act of unlawful export of fertilizers.

Facts of the case :

The respondents were lorry drivers, cleaners, and coolies who were carrying bags of fertilizers from Madhya Pradesh to Maharashtra. While carrying the bags they were intercepted by the sales tax barriers near the border of Maharashtra. They were only having the invoices and other records with them but lack the permit to export the fertilizers to other state. The case was filed against them under Fertilizer (movement control) order ,1973 read with section 3 and 7 of Essential Commodities Act, 1955. 

JUDGEMENT

The Trial Court acquitted the respondents because : 
  1. The prosecution failed to prove mens rea on the part of the respondents. 
  2. The act of the respondents of transportation of fertilizer bags is merely a preperation and not attempted commission of the offence.
The appeal is made to the High Court by the state which respectively dismissed the appeal and upheld the order of the trial court. 

Subsequently the appeal was made to the SUPREME COURT OF INDIA which observed as follows : 
  1. The words "whether knowingly, intentionally or otherwise" are present in section 7 clearly states that mens rea us not an essential ingredient for convicting a person under section 3 of Essential Commodities Act. 
  2. There are four stages in the commission of the crime i.e. intention, preperation, attempt and execution. The first two stages did not attract culpability whereas the other two stages definitely attract culpability. Here in the present case, if the lorries were not intercepted by the sales tax barriers, they would have definitely exported the fertilizers and no one can reasonably predict or say that the lorries were not going to export the bags and that was just for some other purpose as the place of interception was not too far from the border. Thus it is concluded that it is not merely the case of preperation but of attempted unlawful export of the fertilizers. 


YOU MAY ALSO LIKE


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Kailash Wati V. Ajodhia Parkash case summary

Image
KAILASH WATI Vs. AJODHIA PARKASH PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT  19 NOV 1976 CASE UNDER SECTION 9 OF HINDU MARRIAGE ACT. Question before the court Whether the hindu marriage act sanctify or recognise (what may be called as) week end marriage as of a right at the unilateral desire of the wife. Facts of the case The appellant smt. Kailash Wati was married to the respondent Ajodhia Parkash in June 1964. Both of them before marriage were posted as village level teachers. Wife at her parental village of Bilga and husband at kot Ise Khan. After marriage the wife was transferred to her husband's station and they lived together in the matrimonial home for 8-9 months. Contention of the parties Husband : The allegation of the husband is that the wife has got herself transferred back to her parental village and ever since has been residing there with her parents against his wish. Therefore he filled an application for the restitution of conjugal rights under section 9 of HINDU MARRIAGE ACT. 
Read more

Savitri Pandey V. Prem Chandra Pandey summary

Image
SAVITRI PANDEY Vs. PREM CHANDRA PANDEY SUPREME COURT OF INDIA  2002 CASE FOR SECTION 13 OF HINDU MARRIAGE ACT ON THE GROUNDS OF CRUELTY AND DESERTION Facts of the case :  The appellant - wife approached the court for the dissolution of marriage under section 13 of HMA alleging cruelty and desertion against the husband.  Contention of the parties :  Petitioner : Petitioner plead for the dissolution of marriage on the grounds of cruelty and desertion by the husband. Respondent  : Respondent - husband argued that no acts of cruelty were performed to the wife and the petitioner is trying to take advantage of her own wrong.  JUDGEMENT :  The trial court passed the decree in favour of the wife. The court observed that although nothing can establish cruelty against husband, desertion by husband provides sufficient grounds for dissolution of marriage.    High court opined that there was nothing to prove cruelty as against husband and further there was also nothing to prove the desertion by th
Read more

Swaraj Garg V. K. M. Garg summary

Image
SWARAJ GARG  Vs. K.M. GARG DELHI HIGH COURT MARCH 7, 1978 . CASE UNDER SECTION 9 OF HINDU MARRIAGE ACT Question before the court : Where will be the matrimonial home located after the marriage when both the parties are gainfully employed and there does not exist any agreement either implied or written before the marriage.  Facts of the case : The wife Swaraj - petitioner lived in her village, Sunam, from 1956 and techer at the the school. She was the head mistress at government high school in 1969. She got married to the respondent in 1964. The husband was not having a satisfactory job and earn only 500 p/m in Delhi where he resides. She came to live with her husband for some time and then grt back to her village and continue living there. The Husband therefore filed the petition under section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act for restitution of conjugal rights.  Contention of the parties :  Petitioner  : The petitioner argued that respondent's condition is not satisfactory that he can maint
Read more